[Discussion] Am I the only one?

[Lightbringer]

What I find ironic is that women complain about being objectified yet it is they themselves who are the ones that advertise their own bodies in the media.

I don't mind if they do it, but don't blame others for it. We have the right to do what we want with our body, but that doesn't mean I agree with every choice either.

When something like a ***-tape gets more media coverage than a man born in a Korean prison-camp and was the only one to ever escape, exposing the horrors that go on there, that's when it goes too far. Trivial celebrity news gets more headlines than violations of Human Rights and that's what I find disturbing.

 

[SIR HERDERP PRESIDERP SDO]

What I find ironic is that women complain about being objectified yet it is they themselves who are the ones that advertise their own bodies in the media.

I don't mind if they do it, but don't blame others for it. We have the right to do what we want with our body, but that doesn't mean I agree with every choice either.

When something like a ***-tape gets more media coverage than a man born in a Korean prison-camp and was the only one to ever escape, exposing the horrors that go on there, that's when it goes too far. Trivial celebrity news gets more headlines than violations of Human Rights and that's what I find disturbing.

Refer to post #7

 

[Transcendence]

Refer to post #7

Why are you still here?

 

[SIR HERDERP PRESIDERP SDO]

Yeah, I agree to some degree...but those themselves wanted to be seen that way.

Like the saying goes "If you got it, flaunt it!"

 

[~Ethereal~]

Like the saying goes "If you got it, flaunt it!"

Exactly, lol.

 

[Lightbringer]

Refer to post #7

You're essentially saying that being a stripper is not a bad thing. Because that is literally what they do.

She's exploiting her own image for a profit and fame. Sure she can be a mother and good for her but that doesn't change the fact that she's degrading herself to make some cash.

Now I can understand desperation but that is not the case with people like Kim Kardashian, who are just vain and take off their clothes for some attention. Things like that can subject the child to a life or ridicule or ruin the family's image....like Kim has done to hers.

They are exploiting men's desire and then complain about how they are being sexualized by men in the process or harassed on the streets.

If it was a choice to live as a *** symbol then they should be ready for the consequences. It's these types of choices that resonate throughout the entire female population. The actions of one can create a bad image for everyone else.

 

[SIR HERDERP PRESIDERP SDO]

You're essentially saying that being a stripper is not a bad thing. Because that is literally what they do.

She's exploiting her own image for a profit and fame. Sure she can be a mother and good for her but that doesn't change the fact that she's degrading herself to make some cash.

Now I can understand desperation but that is not the case with people like Kim Kardashian, who are just vain and take off their clothes for some attention. Things like that can subject the child to a life or ridicule or ruin the family's image....like Kim has done to hers.

They are exploiting men's desire and then complain about how they are being sexualized by men in the process or harassed on the streets.

And how is this any different from sexy stars who doesn't do porn? They're still using their physical attractiveness as their means of livelihood, are they degrading themselves for being sexy?

 

[Lightbringer]

And how is this any different from a sexy stars who doesn't do porn? They're still using their physical attractiveness as their means of livelihood, are they degrading themselves for being sexy?

There's a difference between pulling my **** out and taking my shirt off. Movie actresses that pose nude on film do so in order to create something meaningful, such as a movie with an underlying message (at least most of the time).

Porn stars that have *** on camera have the intention of only getting the viewers horny and satisfied. Musicians who feel the need to expose themselves on stage (Nicki Minaj) or masturbate in front of a crowd (Miley Cyrus) instead of relying on music to sell are not good musicians. They just know that their bodies will be the core of the attention and not their music.

That's when the terms "objectifying" and "degradation" comes into play.

Being attractive and trying to maintain a good looking appearance is not the same as showing off your goods for cash or fame.


Regardless, like I've said before, they're free to do what they like. I just find it ironic that they complain about the consequences afterwards.

And as I've said before, my main point actually, is that it's disgusting that things such as a *** tape get more widespread coverage than news that really matters.

 

[SIR HERDERP PRESIDERP SDO]

There's a difference between pulling my **** out and taking my shirt off. Movie actresses that pose nude on film do so in order to create something meaningful, such as a movie with an underlying message (at least most of the time).

Porn stars that have *** on camera have the intention of only getting the viewers horny and satisfied. Musicians who feel the need to expose themselves on stage (Nicki Minaj) or masturbate in front of a crowd (Miley Cyrus) instead of relying on music to sell are not good musicians. They just know that their bodies will be the core of the attention.

Regardless, like I've said before, they're free to do what they like. I just find it ironic that they complain about the consequences afterwards.

And as I've said before, my main point actually, is that it's disgusting that things such as a *** tape get more widespread coverage than news that really matters.

And how is exciting the natural passions and senses not meaningful? Maybe not to the point of having *** on film but posing nude or showing their feminine assets (cleavage, legs, etc.), the only difference is the degree in which they use them, it's still ***.

 

[Soloist]

This ***** sounds like a member of the freethenipplecampaign

 

[Lightbringer]

And how is exciting the natural passions and senses not meaningful? Maybe not to the point of having *** on film but posing nude or showing their feminine assets (cleavage, legs, etc.), the only difference is the degree in which they use them, it's still ***.

It's exactly the degree that differentiates how meaningful it is. It's the same way we differentiate fighting out of spite as opposed to self-defense.

There is no passion in simple lust. Lust is lust, not love. Preying on lust will only cause more lust.

Secondly, when it's nudity in film, the film doesn't usually advertise it nor is it the main attraction. It's simply a mechanic that is part of a larger story. Porn is all about ***.

 

[SIR HERDERP PRESIDERP SDO]

It's exactly the degree that differentiates how meaningful it is. It's the same way we differentiate fighting out of spite as opposed to self-defense.

There is no passion in simple lust. Lust is lust, not love. Preying on lust will only cause more lust.

And what does love got to do with it? They're using their sensual beauty for their profession, not for interpersonal means.

 

[Lightbringer]

And what does love got to do with it? They're using their sensual beauty for their profession, not for interpersonal means.

Because you're making is sound as though lust is a good thing.

 

[SIR HERDERP PRESIDERP SDO]

Because you're making is sound as though lust is a good thing.

It's human nature.

 

[Lightbringer]

It's human nature.

So is greed, envy, and pride. Being a part of human nature doesn't instinctively make them good. These are the feelings that have the potential to ruin other people's lives.

 

[SIR HERDERP PRESIDERP SDO]

So is greed, envy, and pride. Being a part of human nature doesn't instinctively make them good. These are the feelings that have the potential to ruin other people's lives.

That is a categorical error for those things you mentioned are brought forth by social conditioning, not evolutionary nature.

 

[Lightbringer]

That is a categorical error for those things you mentioned are brought forth by social conditioning, not evolutionary nature.

That's why I said "potential." Context is key. And as you said it's social conditioning, which is exactly what this topic is about.

 

[SIR HERDERP PRESIDERP SDO]

That's why I said "potential." Context is key. And as you said it's social conditioning, which is exactly what this topic is about.

Greed, Envy, Pride, Jealousy,etc. are brought forth by social conditioning, lust and sexual desire is not, it's innate, it's an adaptive evolutionary mechanism, in psychoanalytics it's called the pleasure principle, the gratification of the id.

 

[Lightbringer]

Greed, Envy, Pride, Jealousy,etc. are brought forth by social conditioning, lust and sexual desire is not, it's innate, it's an adaptive evokutionary mechanism, in psychoanalytics it's called the pleasure principle, the gratification of the id.

The degree to the amount of lust you feel is brought forth by social conditioning. Not all forms of lust are equal.

I'm not here to argue evolution with you.

 

[SIR HERDERP PRESIDERP SDO]

The degree to the amount of lust you feel is brought forth by social conditioning. Not all forms of lust are equal.

I'm not here to argue evolution with you.

No it is innate per se, like the libido of animals or lions or bulls in mating season, by arguing like in your example that an increase in lust leads to unfavorable outcomes like ruining relationships and such that is appealing ad consequentiam.